The Times today
Mrs Merkel criticises President Trump for failing to endorse the 2015
Paris climate change deal. However, the Deutsche Presse-Agentur, a
press agency, reports that more than 330,000 German households have
been cut off from the electricity grid because of a failure to pay the
massive prices. This is due to increasing climate subsidies for
renewables. So is it any wonder Mr Trump has doubts? As a result of
Mrs Merkelâ€ s climate policies, energy poverty is engulfing Germany.
She may say that Europe can no longer depend on Britain and the US,
but in reality it is Britain and the US who can no longer rely on
Germany and Europe.
Terri Jackson 31 May
Wednesday, 31 May 2017
Saturday, 20 May 2017
Escaping the Paris climate agreement. DETROIT NEWS!
H. Sterling Burnett 12:06 a.m. ET May 18, 2017
12 CONNECTTWEET 9 COMMENTEMAILMORE
It’s time for this administration to keep its promise, by getting the U.S. out of this flawed, costly agreement.
Some in Trump’s team have reportedly said if the United States’ commitments are restructured there might be a path to stay in the Paris climate agreement. While there may be a better deal to be had — after all, the Obama administration could hardly have negotiated a worse deal for Americans — there is no deal that would be good for the country. Even Trump can’t put lipstick on this very ugly pig.
The question is not whether Trump should keep his word and withdraw from the Paris agreement; it’s simply a matter of choosing the best way to do so. There are three options.
The first way to cancel America’s participation in the Paris climate agreement — and the one that most directly satisfies Trump’s campaign commitment — is simply to withdraw the United States’ signature entirely. Under the Paris agreement, any country can withdraw from the agreement by giving written notice of a decision to do so to the U.N. secretary general. Unfortunately, under the terms of the agreement, Trump can’t give such notice until the agreement has been in place for three years, which means the earliest withdrawal date is Oct. 5, 2019.
Making matters worse, the withdrawal does not become effective until one year after the written notice is delivered. This means even if Trump determines to withdraw from the Paris agreement today, the country will remain stuck with its terms for a minimum of almost four years, and while America remains a party to the agreement, it is obligated to keep its commitments. Because the four-year withdrawal period will not run out until after Trump’s first term is over, should he decide not to run for president again or should he run for re-election and lose, the next president could simply recommit the United States to the agreement with a simple signature.
The second way to scotch America’s commitments under the Paris climate agreement would be for Trump to submit it to the Senate for formal approval as a treaty. This is what Obama should have done in the first place. To become a binding treaty, the Senate would have to approve the Paris climate agreement by a two-thirds vote. If the agreement loses the treaty vote — and it likely would in a full vote of the Senate — the deal is canceled.
However, nothing requires the Senate to hold an up-or-down vote on the Paris climate agreement if Trump submits it to them. Using the Senate filibuster rules, Senate Democrats could block the treaty from ever coming up for a vote. Such a move is likely, since the vast majority of Democrats support the Paris agreement. Under this scenario, the treaty would remain pending, leaving a future Senate to decide its fate.
The easiest way for Trump to end U.S. participation in Paris and all international climate agreements would be for him to remove the country’s signature from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), signed by President George H.W. Bush in 1992. Article 25 of the UNFCCC allows any state party to the convention to withdraw, without further obligation, upon giving one year’s notice. Withdrawing from UNFCCC would cancel the United States’ obligations to all other United Nations-brokered climate agreements made subsequent to UNFCCC, because they are all built on it.
This would be the best and easiest way to get out of the Paris climate agreement, and it would help to prevent future burdensome climate agreements.